discokermit
Well-Known Member
you said most people hadn't given a shit for decades. i'm saying, since the war, leninists have played key parts in various struggles that have affected everyone.
SWP expulsions and squabbles
- Thread starter Nigel Irritable
- Start date
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
that's not necessarily something to be proud of, so have capitalists.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
yes, people have also given a shit about those.
edit, saltley, nothing to be proud of, lol!
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
I don't think the 'less or more advanced' stuff is about knowledge so much as having the right politics. So the SWP would describe a militant trade unionist who had never read a word of Marx as more advanced than a right wing university professor who had read the complete works. Of course the two things can come together, having more knowledge tends to lead to better politics. just to be clear this is how I understand the SWP line, it is not my personal view as I don't know what my personal view is at the moment.
Something that was often repeated within the SWP is that these relations are not fixed and that often the more backward sections can leap ahead of the more advanced.
I have been following the Butchers vs Nigel Debate with interest, but still don't feel I have quite grasped butchers point. I tend to think Nigel was right with his point about the language used being part of the problem. Such terms as 'advanced' and 'vanguad*' tend to be interpreted as implying a degree of inherent superiority, but I don't think this is what lies behind the idea. However, in practice many vanguardist parties act in this way, so I suppose you could say I agree with the theory but think it is not being applied correctly. The question then becomes: is this an invertible result of adopting the theory. Where I would part with Nigel is that I am starting to thin it is .
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
Come on his blog is called 'Lenin's Tomb' he has obviously been looking forward to the death of Leninism for years.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
I think that most working class people in this country since the war haven't opted for, wanted or cared for Leninist organisation, leadership or revolution. Or am I wrong? And there are many reasons for this. My specific point earlier was with regard to frogwoman talking about the arrogance of those who see themselves as being a vanguard, advanced, above, over, better able to think and act than me, my partner, mum, mates, neighbours, the non-Leninist trade union rep at work etc ... And how laughable that is, when people do not see them in that way, if they have even ever heard of them. I am not coming from a teenage anarchist position of all Leninists are cunts by the way.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
you saying it wasn't? scargills finest moment, one of the high points of british class struggle, nothing to be proud of?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
could you point to where i said it wasn't anything to be proud of?
that's where the strawman comes in, because you can't.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
i think you're wrong. you deserve a better answer but i can't really be arsed at the minute and don't seem to be making myself clear. if you don't mind, i'll try to get back to it tomorrow.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
oh fuck off you twat.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i'll take that as a 'no' then.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
ugh.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
grand
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
capitalists have played key parts in various struggles that have affected everyone. often, it's true, on the capitalist side. so saying that leninists have played key parts in various struggles that have affected everyone leaves one important question unanswered: which side were they on? objectively there have been a number of occasions when they've been very much on the side of reaction, on the capitalist side. taking the party which is the subject of this thread, i think many people would say that objectively their pursuit of the growth of the party and their pursuit of the maintenance of the swp's dominant role on the left led them to do things which were reactionary. their smashing of the socialist alliance. their promotion of the respect: the unity coalition. their role in the anl mk2. their role in the stop the war coalition. and that's just the most obvious parts off the top of my head. other leninist parties at other times played less than sparkling revolutionary roles. so, what could have been popular and broad-based campaigns, like the anti-war movement, were undermined by self-proclaimed leninists. the presence of leninists, therefore, not always something to boast about. btw, i don't think saltley was a leninist success: i'd be really rather surprised if more than 5% of the people there were leninists, and quite taken aback if it was that proportion.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
you're not that thick? surely?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
perhaps you could point out the bits you particularly disagree with.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
i really can't be arsed.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
you never can.
Oisin123
So Much for Subtlety
No one here - except possibly bolshiebhoy - relishes being bossed around by someone who thinks they have all the answers, in any walk of life. But equally, there is an undeniable spectrum of political understanding in the working class. A racist, or a Tory voting worker, is politically mistaken and it is not arrogant to say so. Nor to argue over more complex matters with your partner, mum, mates, neighbours, etc. The arrogance comes in, I think, not when like-minded people form revolutionary parties. But when they say, for example, 'because I've fought oppression for thirty years, I'm a person of integrity and I can judge a rape accusation when the accused is a senior member of my party and a friend of mine. I can put aside possible biases. I can ignore how this might look.' In other words, when they stop listening and when it does not occur to them that they might be mistaken. In theory, the SWP 'learns from the class' and ought to be listening. Probably many of them are. But not the CC and those responsible for the recent frenetic NC motions.
Complex matters have been and are argued over, outside a party.
sihhi
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered
I don't know how the discussion got onto discussing (presumably working-class) fascism and Toryism - it's a truism that these are backward ideas, but that truism tells us nothing.
I agree with Oisin I think. I would be willing to take the idea of the vanguard of the advanced w/c more seriously if they actually had some actual content to what they were saying that was so advanced that didn't involve some explanation that the advanced are found in the party/parties hence the reason that they are advanced.
If you actual look at the content - what's really being said strip away the endpoint stuff (communist classless society) and the Marxist guff there's precious little apart from re-hashing ideas from the past and hoping for some kind of 1960s/70s Keynesian settlement to restored on the basis of uniting with people who leave the Labour Party now. No one (including me I'll grant that) really seems to be preparing for what happens if that Keynesian settlement doesn't happen, when the union bureaucracy doesn't accede to "pressure"/"voices" from below, when strikes amongst low union density sectors don't break out, when urban Britain does become an increasingly polarised, potentially gang-heavy USA-style society.
What is so "advanced" about saying 'the Tebbitt trade union laws should be repealed, they don't help trade unions' or saying 'the party unites the struggles like no other organisation can' or 'the class needs leadership'?
This is what advanced sections of the working-class look like to 'ordinary' people (the mums and dads from posters with non-political families): large voices, lots of hands, but content-wise little of genuine substance. Not edited, just transcribed from Molyneux's talk with the hand gestures used during that bit from this SWP full-timer (don't want to pick on this person in particular, it could be any SWP full-timer):
I dunno, this whole SWP thing feels odd - the prospects for resolution of W's case seem more remote as time goes on. Delta remains in post in U.A.F. according to the website.
The "advanced elements" line just makes no sense - if the SWP was so advanced would they have so monumentally screwed up a rape investigation?
I feel if all this is advanced, then I want to be a simple Simon. We can't know but many believe the DC made up its procedure as it went along - being a rape counsellor to rape victims in your day job doesn't mean anything in terms of conducting an investigation into a friend of yours. It all just stinks so bad - and after over a month, the smell isn't getting any better.
I agree with Oisin I think. I would be willing to take the idea of the vanguard of the advanced w/c more seriously if they actually had some actual content to what they were saying that was so advanced that didn't involve some explanation that the advanced are found in the party/parties hence the reason that they are advanced.
If you actual look at the content - what's really being said strip away the endpoint stuff (communist classless society) and the Marxist guff there's precious little apart from re-hashing ideas from the past and hoping for some kind of 1960s/70s Keynesian settlement to restored on the basis of uniting with people who leave the Labour Party now. No one (including me I'll grant that) really seems to be preparing for what happens if that Keynesian settlement doesn't happen, when the union bureaucracy doesn't accede to "pressure"/"voices" from below, when strikes amongst low union density sectors don't break out, when urban Britain does become an increasingly polarised, potentially gang-heavy USA-style society.
What is so "advanced" about saying 'the Tebbitt trade union laws should be repealed, they don't help trade unions' or saying 'the party unites the struggles like no other organisation can' or 'the class needs leadership'?
This is what advanced sections of the working-class look like to 'ordinary' people (the mums and dads from posters with non-political families): large voices, lots of hands, but content-wise little of genuine substance. Not edited, just transcribed from Molyneux's talk with the hand gestures used during that bit from this SWP full-timer (don't want to pick on this person in particular, it could be any SWP full-timer):
I dunno, this whole SWP thing feels odd - the prospects for resolution of W's case seem more remote as time goes on. Delta remains in post in U.A.F. according to the website.
The "advanced elements" line just makes no sense - if the SWP was so advanced would they have so monumentally screwed up a rape investigation?
I feel if all this is advanced, then I want to be a simple Simon. We can't know but many believe the DC made up its procedure as it went along - being a rape counsellor to rape victims in your day job doesn't mean anything in terms of conducting an investigation into a friend of yours. It all just stinks so bad - and after over a month, the smell isn't getting any better.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Well, I really don"t know what else to suggest
Some of your questions can be answered by looking at their websites. And/or emailing them to see if they'll answer if nothing's forthcoming from any anarchist posters that might be following this thread. But I've already told you that I'm not a member of any of these groups and I've specifically told you that I've got no connection to AFED at all.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Fair enough, we'll complete the ritual exchange some other time.
That was almost a porn film starring a certain Urban poster
love detective
there's no love too small
poor mat 
was that when they took him up the hill to do a human respect sign?
was that when they took him up the hill to do a human respect sign?
Plastic Red
New Member
It seems to me that the lack of responsiviness created bythe sort of organisational structure the SWP has is illustrated by the SWP's seeming suspision of the internet. I realise that I'm preaching to the choir but I'm stunned they have no forum on their website. Admittedly it would be a pretty huge task to moderate. But what better tool to make your argument? You can respond at length and in as much detail as you like, plug you books or other peoples, gather e-mail address' for organising etc etc. Yet they insist on using the paper as the main platform. Based on the activities of a party before much radio, television, phones, internet, texting, internet etc.
Russia had less than 40% litercay when the Bolsheviks used the paper as their main platform for argument.
http://www.isreview.org/issues/82/feat-educationandrevolution.shtml
Britan today has about 80% internet coverage
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2...access--households-and-individuals--2012.html
I can't see any reason the obsesssion with paper sales. Unless they need the money to pay their own wages.
Russia had less than 40% litercay when the Bolsheviks used the paper as their main platform for argument.
http://www.isreview.org/issues/82/feat-educationandrevolution.shtml
Britan today has about 80% internet coverage
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2...access--households-and-individuals--2012.html
I can't see any reason the obsesssion with paper sales. Unless they need the money to pay their own wages.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
I'd be surprised if they do much more than break even on the papers, it's certainly no money spinner.
Similar threads
